Steven Avery (making a murderer) Guilty or innocent?

There's a lot of things which don't add up in Steven's case, like failing to crush the car when he had the means at his disposal so to speak, but even still, he didn't strike me as completely innocent. When he heard his verdict, his reaction wasn't one of a completely innocent man. Minimal emotion. Zero outrage. There was just apathy from him as he sat there and listened.

I'm aware he was locked up for months in the lead-up to the trial and probably expected a guilty verdict, which would've made him less surprised, but if you're about to effectively lose your life because of something you didn't do, you don't sit there quietly. Yet he did. Even at his elocution, did he strike anyone as completely innocent? I heard a man maintaining his innocence, but his general demenaour seemed to betray his words. He looked and sounded defeated in his bid to convince people that he's innocent. He knows that he's guilty.

It's far less cut and dry with Brendan, who seems to have been victimised by his own lack of intelligence, but there has to be more to that story. There's no way he'd still be locked up if there was video evidence of him being cohersed into making a confession, which there obviously is. The case for his wrongful conviction seems overwhelmingly strong, which is why there has to be another part of the story.

Finally, It's probably been mentioned, but I really like Dean Strang. You can tell that he and his partner were emotionally attached to the case, which was good to see given that his opposite numbers in the prosecution were solely focused on a conviction.

MadDog76

Hammer89 wrote: »

There's a lot of things which don't add up in Steven's case, like failing to crush the car when he had the means at his disposal so to speak, but even still, he didn't strike me as completely innocent. When he heard his verdict, his reaction wasn't one of a completely innocent man. Minimal emotion. Zero outrage. There was just apathy from him as he sat there and listened.

I'm aware he was locked up for months in the lead-up to the trial and probably expected a guilty verdict, which would've made him less surprised, but if you're about to effectively lose your life because of something you didn't do, you don't sit there quietly. Yet he did. Even at his elocution, did he strike anyone as completely innocent? I heard a man maintaining his innocence, but his general demenaour seemed to betray his words. He looked and sounded defeated in his bid to convince people that he's innocent. He knows that he's guilty.

It's far less cut and dry with Brendan, who seems to have been victimised by his own lack of intelligence, but there has to be more to that story. There's no way he'd still be locked up if there was video evidence of him being cohersed into making a confession, which there obviously is. The case for his wrongful conviction seems overwhelmingly strong, which is why there has to be another part of the story.

Finally, It's probably been mentioned, but I really like Dean Strang. You can tell that he and his partner were emotionally attached to the case, which was good to see given that his opposite numbers in the prosecution were solely focused on a conviction.

He seems upset and disappointed to me ...........

Does he look like someone who has been told he's about to spend the rest of his life in prison for something he didn't do? Not to me it doesn't. I'll be more upset than he is there if the football results go against my team tomorrow afternoon.

threeball

Hammer89 wrote: »

There's a lot of things which don't add up in Steven's case, like failing to crush the car when he had the means at his disposal so to speak, but even still, he didn't strike me as completely innocent. When he heard his verdict, his reaction wasn't one of a completely innocent man. Minimal emotion. Zero outrage. There was just apathy from him as he sat there and listened.

I'm aware he was locked up for months in the lead-up to the trial and probably expected a guilty verdict, which would've made him less surprised, but if you're about to effectively lose your life because of something you didn't do, you don't sit there quietly. Yet he did. Even at his elocution, did he strike anyone as completely innocent? I heard a man maintaining his innocence, but his general demenaour seemed to betray his words. He looked and sounded defeated in his bid to convince people that he's innocent. He knows that he's guilty.

It's far less cut and dry with Brendan, who seems to have been victimised by his own lack of intelligence, but there has to be more to that story. There's no way he'd still be locked up if there was video evidence of him being cohersed into making a confession, which there obviously is. The case for his wrongful conviction seems overwhelmingly strong, which is why there has to be another part of the story.

Finally, It's probably been mentioned, but I really like Dean Strang. You can tell that he and his partner were emotionally attached to the case, which was good to see given that his opposite numbers in the prosecution were solely focused on a conviction.

If hes the emotional person you believe him to be surely he his guilt would be written all over his face in the tv interviews immediately after the murder or in the phone call to his girlfriend who he called in jail within an hour of shooting this girl in the head?
Maybe he had just resigned himselt to being screwed again.
You have a case where virtually all the evidence against avery is found by cops who shouldnt be on the property. A cop who calls in a number plate of halbachs car before the car was found in averys yard. A case where they use completely different scenarios to charge two different people for the same murder. A case where the scenario laid out in the press conference never saw the light of day in trial?
Beyond reasonable doubt? Hope I never end up relying on a jury with you on it

JustTheOne

Just seen evidence of him blocking his number calling Theresa earlier in the day then unblocking it 5 hours later.

Why?

Hammer89 wrote: »

Does he look like someone who has been told he's about to spend the rest of his life in prison for something he didn't do? Not to me it doesn't. I'll be more upset than he is there if the football results go against my team tomorrow afternoon.

God I thought he looked gutted. Found that scene quite upsetting.

JustTheOne wrote: »

Just seen evidence of him blocking his number calling Theresa earlier in the day then unblocking it 5 hours later.

Why?

Maybe he just felt like it. Doesnt make him a murderer like

Hammer89 wrote: »

Does he look like someone who has been told he's about to spend the rest of his life in prison for something he didn't do? Not to me it doesn't. I'll be more upset than he is there if the football results go against my team tomorrow afternoon.

He had been through an unlawful conviction before. He's looking at the jury as if, "how could you convict me?".

That's how I seen it. You obviously seen it differently. It's funny how people can perceive things in different ways depending on what they believe.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Guilty....... as sin!

On what evidence

PowerToWait

If we're judging people on looking guilty / up to no good, then I think its only fair we send the ex and the brother to jail as well.

m1ck007 wrote: »

Maybe he just felt like it. Doesnt make him a murderer like

I dunno why anyone would just do that because they felt like it - I think it's a bit strange. Doesn't mean I think he's a murderer - most arguments convince me of his innocence, but for me, there is still a teeny bit of room for doubt.

Azalea wrote: »

I dunno why anyone would just do that because they felt like it - I think it's a bit strange. Doesn't mean I think he's a murderer - most arguments convince me of his innocence, but for me, there is still a teeny bit of room for doubt.

Yea i agree there is room for doubt bur essentially there wasnt enough 'evidence' to convict him and he should be a free man

threeball

Azalea wrote: »

I dunno why anyone would just do that because they felt like it - I think it's a bit strange. Doesn't mean I think he's a murderer - most arguments convince me of his innocence, but for me, there is still a teeny bit of room for doubt.

Isn't that the whole point of the series and the justice system in general? You may well think theres a possibilty hes guilty but you're not convinced enough to send him to jail for the rest of his life hence he goes free

Azalea wrote: »

God I thought he looked gutted. Found that scene quite upsetting.

I'm not saying he doesn't look gutted - I'm saying he doesn't look as gutted as an innocent person would or should had they discovered they'd be spending the rest of their lives in jail.

He was always going to look gutted regardless whether he did it or not. He'd have known his defence put up a mighty good fight, possibly prompting a bit of hope on his part, but that guilty verdict confirmed his worst fears basically.

It's the minimal emotion which I can't understand, if he is indeed innocent. No tears. No signs of anger. No pleading. No immediate dispute of any kind. There were just moments of self-pity as he shook his head to each side a few times. That's it. The fact that he had already lost 18 years through a wrongful conviction is all the more reason to display some sort of emotion aside from a bit of head shaking I think.

Azalea wrote: »

God I thought he looked gutted. Found that scene quite upsetting.

Hammer89 wrote: »

I'm not saying he doesn't look gutted - I'm saying he doesn't look as gutted as an innocent person would or should had they discovered they'd be spending the rest of their lives in jail.

He was always going to look gutted regardless whether he did it or not. He'd have known his defence put up a mighty good fight, possibly prompting a bit of hope on his part, but that guilty verdict confirmed his worst fears basically.

It's the minimal emotion which I can't understand, if he is indeed innocent. No tears. No signs of anger. No pleading. No immediate dispute of any kind. There were just moments of self-pity as he shook his head to each side a few times. That's it. The fact that he had already lost 18 years through a wrongful conviction is all the more reason to display some sort of emotion aside from a bit of head shaking I think.

What do you want man? Seriously, to expect a certain level of reaction when you haven't been anywhere near what he's been through (presuming he's innocent) is just ridiculous.

mewe wrote: »

What do you want man? Seriously, to expect a certain level of reaction when you haven't been anywhere near what he's been through (presuming he's innocent) is just ridiculous.

Neither have you so where exactly do you get the bollox to tell me I'm wrong?

threeball

mewe wrote: »

What do you want man? Seriously, to expect a certain level of reaction when you haven't been anywhere near what he's been through (presuming he's innocent) is just ridiculous.

He thinks everyone in life should act like a cornation street character just to add drama to the situation. Doesnt seem to comprehend people deal with life events in different ways.

Hammer89 wrote: »

Neither have you so where exactly do you get the bollox to tell me I'm wrong?

I'm not the one questioning someones level of reaction in such a serious situation.

Hammer89 wrote: »

I'm not saying he doesn't look gutted - I'm saying he doesn't look as gutted as an innocent person would or should had they discovered they'd be spending the rest of their lives in jail.

He was always going to look gutted regardless whether he did it or not. He'd have known his defence put up a mighty good fight, possibly prompting a bit of hope on his part, but that guilty verdict confirmed his worst fears basically.

It's the minimal emotion which I can't understand, if he is indeed innocent. No tears. No signs of anger. No pleading. No immediate dispute of any kind. There were just moments of self-pity as he shook his head to each side a few times. That's it. The fact that he had already lost 18 years through a wrongful conviction is all the more reason to display some sort of emotion aside from a bit of head shaking I think.

Guess it's a matter of personal perspective. He looked exactly as upset as I expected him to - a look of knowing it was likely that that would be the verdict. At the end of his tether - no energy left to get worked up anymore.

Hammer89 wrote: »

Neither have you so where exactly do you get the bollox to tell me I'm wrong?

Btw what are you on about with how do I have the bollox to tell you you're wrong? Is your opinion fact? Let us all bow down to your superior opinion. Seriously, get real.

Hammer89 wrote: »

Neither have you so where exactly do you get the bollox to tell me I'm wrong?

Are you....... Ken Kratz??

mewe wrote: »

Btw what are you on about with how do I have the bollox to tell you you're wrong? Is your opinion fact? Let us all bow down to your superior opinion. Seriously, get real.

Me get real? You're the one jumping down people's throat for suggesting that Steven Avery is guilty and then offering amateur theories as to why he might be guilty.

Is my opinion fact? No. I used the phrase "I think" at the very end of my last post. Does that suggest I'm speaking authoritatively about this subject? It's my opinion.

Hammer89 wrote: »

Me get real? You're the one jumping down people's throat for suggesting that Steven Avery is guilty and then offering amateur theories as to why he might be guilty.

Is my opinion fact? No. I used the phrase "I think" at the very end of my last post. Does that suggest I'm speaking authoritatively about this subject? It's my opinion.

What are you on about? What amateur theory did I offer? I simply called you out on your (imo) amateur psychoanalysis. You need to calm down there Chet.

I'm talking about my amateur theories. You see, I'm quite humble mate. I'm not trying to come across as an expert. I'm not taking people's heads off for having alternative views. You, on the other hand, are. I'm the one who needs to calm down though :rolleyes:

Ladies, please - no fighting in the war room.